posted 02-28-200104:49 PM
I don't know why, but this topic has come up a lot between my mom and I. Well actually it comes up anytime anyone mentions Rosie O Donell because my mom has this whole theory about her being a lesbian.

Anywho, my mom claims she isn't against gay people, but she doesn't think that gay couples should have kids. Why? Because you need a "male" and "female" influence. Is anyone you know like this? How does it affect you? How do you feel?

It angers me so much that my mom claims to not be prejudice against gays (btw she doesn't know I'm bi), but she doesn't think that they should have families because you need a man and a woman. That assumes that the mom is going to act feminime and the guy is going to act masculine, which may not be true at all. That assumes that you can't be a lesbian and be a good dad.

What would she say if I wanted to have kids with my lesbian girlfriend? I wonder if she would think it's okay because, well, I'm her daughter so I'd be a good parent. Or would she constantly be talking about how I need a man for the children. A part of me says that I'd never let her be around my children since she's so much against gay families, but I know that I probably couldn't do that. I'd want to, but I wouldn't.

Who says that a hetero family is so great? Who says a non-hetero family can't be normal? And all her judgements are based upon the few gay families she's met, and the were all horrible parents she says. She's accnowledged that if they were straight then they would still be horrible parents, but won't change her point of view.

So I questioned transexuals and intergenders. What if a man has a sex change, and totally identifies and acts like a woman "should", then would it be okay for him to have a family with another man? Or shold he have a family with a woman because he was origionally a male. Her opinion on that is that transexuals are so messed up in the head they shouldn't be having kids! She bases this on one transexual she has met (who she says admitted he was messed up in the head). Any trannys I know don't count because it's over the internet, and we all know that no one ever tells the truth on the net. Sorry I had to get that out, so , what do you think?

------------------BrittanyScarleteen Advocate

This person is a natural product. The slight variations in color and texture enhance its individual character and beauty and in no way are to be considered flaws or defects.

posted 02-28-200106:52 PM
the only problem i have with gay families is that people are so shallow that they make fun of the kids for having gay or lesbian parents. people teach this kind of behavior to their kids and its really sad. i personally dont see anything wrong with gay and lesbian couples having kids but society should not put them down and call it wrong just because they dont agree with someone elses lifestyle. there will always be shallow people in the world, you just have to look beyond those people and go on with life.

posted 02-28-200106:59 PM
You know, my family only STOPPED being dysfunctional once my mothers girlfriend came into it, and only got on that path when my parents separated. SAnd let me tell you, even at 6, I wasn't upset that was happening -- growing up amidst tons of fighting doesn't make anyone happy just because there is one man and one woman to argue.

Honestly, bear in mind that only about 25% of the WORLD exists in a nuclear family unit of one male figure, one female. That isn't the norm, it's a rarity. Families can consist and do consist of many, MANY diverse combinations, single parents, same-sex parents, extended families, communes, foster families, adoptive parents, etc. In addition, gender roles and identities are just as diverse -- and we get those influences from a multitude of sources.

The idea that the nucleare family is "ideal" is an old ideal from the fifties, which most likely had a lot to do with women and men feeling the strain from being separaated during the war previous to that time.

posted 02-28-200111:22 PM
This is starting to sound like the first week of my music of the nineteen sixties class. There was this lengthy discussion about what exactly led up to the rebellion against all of these silly ideas about only mom doing the laundry and only dad working from exactly nine to five to provide for his children what his parents couldn't give him.

Oh, there was a subject I was meaning to get to, what was it. Oh yes, the hypocrisy of some people. Which people, mostly people that you know that say one thing then another contradictory thing then act on a precedent set not only by neither of the aforementioned things, but things that have nothing at all to do with what they mean.Having gotten into several such arguments myself, I can sympathize. Perhaps your mom didn't feel that one of her parents was there for her, my mom certainly feels that way, and is manifesting this bizarre complex by feeling that gay people shouldn't have kids. Maybe I'm over analyzing the whole situation, and I think I am becoming paranoid. It's a conspiracy, maybe, they say. The island where they live. Now I know I'm just babbling, like a stream. Bridges, streams, trolls, stories, jabberwock. On that incoherent note, the end.

posted 03-01-200102:13 PM
I agree that kids in gay families get teased alot. People can be so cruel, but I guess they just don't understand. But I have nothing against gay families. A family with two moms or two dads can be just as loving as one with a man and a woman. I know alot of my friends are against gay couples all-together. It makes me so mad to see people being that shallow. I think in a way, being in a gay family can teach the child maturity and understanding.

posted 03-01-200104:06 PM
I agree with Miz Scarelt. Just because there's a male parent and a female parent doesn't mean that the family will be perfect. What matters most is that the child has (a) good parent(s) to support them.

As far as cruelty from other children goes, there's always the idea of moving to a more homosexual-friendly town where people are used to gay parents. I know it's an awful thought to have to pack up and leave town just becasue people don't accept you, but it happens. Hopefully people will, in time, come to realize that diversity is a good thing that shouldn't be made fun of.

posted 03-01-200104:12 PM
Of course, you'd be hard-pressed to find the child who isn't teased mercilessly about something, honestly.When I was growing up, it was about our family being poor, about my having a single mother, about being too smart, about having freckles, about hand-me-down clothes...whatever.

If it isn't one thing it will likely be another. Kids will get teased about anything possible if someone wants to tease them, whether they have two mothers, one father or a mother and a father.

The truth of the matter is is that if kids have a loving family -- no matter it's form or size -- and if they're raised to undesrtand what teasing is (the tool of the insecure and of those who don't understand something), they'll be just fine. They're resilient little stinkers, kids.

posted 03-02-200102:32 PM
I think that if a person is against gays doing anything that is normal and taken for granted by hetero people, then they have a problem. Know what I mean? I really dislike selective "approval" of homosexuality. I think you're either whole hog for it or you fall into the other category.

BTW, I actually do think Rosie is gay. She sets off my gaydar, and it's usually right

quote:BTW, I actually do think Rosie is gay. She sets off my gaydar, and it's usually right

Sorry this is a bit off topic, but I'm curious. I've heard a number of people say that they think she's a lesbian, and while I'm admittedly not that good at reading people, I've never figured out why they think this. What exactly is so gay about her?

And, to be on topic: the idea that gays are fine but shouldn't marry or have kids upsets me. It's prejudice, and while it's better than outright hatred of homosexuals, it's still prejudice. The fact that California's Proposition 22 (a ballot measure from last year that stated that marriage could only be between a man and a woman) passed so easily really made me sad and disappointed.
Posts: 266 | From: Portland, Oregon | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |

quote:And, to be on topic: the idea that gays are fine but shouldn't marry or have kids upsets me. It's prejudice, and while it's better than outright hatred of homosexuals, it's still prejudice

I would agree with that. Even if we aren't all busting to get married to our partners, it would be comforting to know we could if we wanted to. At http://www.godhatesfags.com/ there is a list of gay friendly churches, as well as ones that will marry gay couples. If only I lived there *sigh*

posted 03-09-200106:29 PM
All of you are missing a simple fact. If you make any laws that promote homosexual marriages or adoption, those laws are unconstitutional. Those laws violate the First Amendment rights of Christians who don't believe that homosexuality is a viable lifestyle. This is because the government would force them to recognize something that goes against their religion. That would be like forcing a Jew to recognize Christ as the Messiah. Plus, the tax dollars of Christians would go towards benefits for these homosexual marriages which is another violation of the First Amendment.

------------------"The greatest danger to American freedom is a government that ignores the Constitution."

posted 03-09-200107:01 PM
I suggest if you really want to pursue this argument you do a bit of treading up into general civil rights and what the U.S. Constitution does and doesn't provide, and then you bring it elsewhere.

(Amazingly, you'll find the religious and personal freedom is right up at the top of its list.)

Please don't bring bigotry here. It isn't the place for it, and it benefits no one.

posted 03-09-200107:18 PM
That's an interesting view. I must say that I disagree, though. It's almost impossible to pass a law that doesn't conflict with a certain religion's beliefs. I know that in the Bible it says that child abuse is considered acceptbale, but there are many laws that have been passed by the government against child abuse. And many people are forced to recognize things that they don't believe in by the government. On money, it says, "In God we trust," but many people don't believe in God. And what ever happened to personal freedom, anyway? If two people are in love, they should be able to get married. Well, that's my two cents.
Posts: 500 | From: Ohio, U.S.A. | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |

quote:Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; orthe right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Okay, how does passing laws allowing for the legalization of domestic partnerships regardless of gender relate to that text right there? That's the first amendment.

I really want to know how allowing for homosexuals to marry and adopt children prohibits the exercise of religion. Will it mean that all Christians have to become homosexual? Will it *force* Chrisitians to accept homosexuality? If so, how? Will it mean that Christianity will have to recognize these marriges as well? If so, how? I dont' think it does.

posted 03-09-200107:22 PM
No offense, Miz Scarlet, but I don't appreciate being called a bigot. Rather, you seem to be the bigot for not tolerating my religion.

As for the Constitutional issue, I have yet to see why you believe my argument concering the First Amendment was not valid. Perhaps you should read the Bill of Rights before making a politically motivated assumption.

------------------"The greatest danger to American freedom is a government that ignores the Constitution."

posted 03-09-200107:28 PM
It's in the post right above yours, honey. have a read.

And I did not call *you* a bigot. Bigotry, by definition, is intolerance for any one group. I do not know the group you represent, but if you feel it is Christians, I certainly have no intolerance for that group, and neither does this site, which has a myriad of users who subscribe to that tradition.

However, what you are bringing here is not acceptable at this site, and you can rest assured that not only have I read the Constitution on a occasion or two before, but this site is NOT a democracy. It is a dictatorship.

Respect the people here, please -- including those who are not hetertosexual -- or leave. I would gander based on your flurry of posts thus far this evening that for the most part, given what you have represented as your beliefs (which are not, in my experience, Christian beliefs as a whole), you may find this place simply has little to offer you.

posted 03-09-200107:38 PM
The United States offers insurance coverage?

When did that happen, other than Medicare and Medicaid?

And for that matter, if I think killing iswrong, but my tax dollars go to help pay for the military, is it a violationof my first amendment rights?

I fail to see how the passing of a law that would allow for marriage between persons of the same gender would interfere with the exercise of your religion if homosexuals and their partners are not receiving any benefits from the government.

And I'd appreciate it if you could show me just where these benefits would be coming from. I'd like citations -- web citations are fine, but print sources that I can look up would be even better.

posted 03-09-200107:42 PM
You have no hatred or problem with homosexuality? Really? This sound familiar?

"Homosexuality: I believe that homosexuality is a sin and therefore is NOT a viable alternative lifestyle. People always want to debate this with me. Homosexuality is a perversion and the Bible indicates that it is a sin against God. (Leviticus 18:22"

It should, It's from your own web page.

This was another of my personal favorites, by the by, especially as the daughter of an immigrant family: "We don't need anymore immigrants in this country. If we don't begin to cut back on the number of immigrants now, then this country will soon be over populated. I blame urban sprawl and loss of forests on immigration. If you can't speak ENGLISH, then you shouldn't be allowed in this country. "

Regardless of how you feel, you are stating such in a forum for our GLBT population which we assure them will be nurturing and safe. And since orientation is not a "lifestyle," just like heterosexuality is not a "lifestyle" it is NOT acceptable here at Scarleteen to discriminate against someone or judge them by their gender, race, creed, nationality, social strata, religion OR orientation.

And it is HIGHLY inappropriate to come into an area intended FOR our GLBT population with this.

If you're serious about being respectful (which I question, because we have gotten email from your address in the past), you will respect that, just as, for instance, you would expect a Christian Chruch to be resppected, not full of people waliing in during a service and talking about how Christianity is unacceptable.

And if you;re serious about being respectful you'll understand that part of our registration guidelines make clear that this sort of approach isn't acceptable at our boards.

posted 03-09-200107:55 PM
What about the tax dollars of people who do think that homosexual marriage is something that should be allowed? People who do not support homosexual unions are not the only people who pay tax.

Not being American I've never worried about the constitution- gay marriages don't hurt anyone- while they would help people who, by virtue of the fact that they are not heterosexual, have had to put up with an awful lot of discrimination in their lives. I don't see how any churches could be forced to recognise it (although I would not enjoy being in a church that was homophobic). Just one question though- if there was a religion in the US that did not acknowledge heterosexual marriages, would heterosexual marriage then be unconstitutional as well?

As for Pixie's topic- yes, I agree- whether or not someone is capable of being a good parent has nothing to do with their sexual orientation. Here in Australia our government passed a law saying that women in long term homosexual relationships cannot get IVF treatment- they are classified as "single". I find that sickeningly homophobic.

posted 03-09-200108:32 PM
Erin--So you are anti-military? If you believe that we should have no military, then you need wake up to reality. Second, states such as Vermont offer married couples certain benefits.

Miz Scarlet--Again, it seems as though you are putting words in my mouth. I dislike the homosexual lifestyle, not the individuals themselves. Rather, I know several homosexuals who work for my mother. All are quite bright and friendly. I feel sorry for them because I believe that they have a problem.

Anyway, on the immigration issue, what I said is true concerning sprawl and urban outgrowth. Plus, what's wrong with having English as the national language?

------------------"The greatest danger to American freedom is a government that ignores the Constitution."

posted 03-11-200111:16 PM
I am christian, but I accept the religious, social, and personal choices people make. I can understand many people are raised homophobic, but I don't like people using the bible as a phrasebook for putting down the GLBT community.

IMO, you are missing the point of christianity, which is unconditional love.

Winnie

P.S. I don't expect a reply, nor do I want one.

------------------..because being evil is soo much more fun..~dark queen of scully's non-existant social life~

Member of OBSSE & GAWS

"True friends are like diamonds, precious and rare, false friends are like autumn leaves, blowing everywhere"

posted 03-18-200102:50 PM
I have seen a 20/20 or Dateline where they interviewed gay couples that either adopted kids or artificially created them with a sperm donor, and personaly I see nothing wrong with it. Times are changing. Before people were totally against different races marrying each other and having kids. Why can't gay and lesbians do it too? They're humans like the rest of us and they deserve the same rights as the rest of the population. They shouldn't be judged by their sexuality or the way they choose to live their lives. That's what I think. I think people should learn to except it. Like racism, we should all learn that everyone is human wether they be white, black, gay, lesbian, or bisexual. It all boils down to wether they are happy with their lives. Thakns.
Posts: 15 | From: Toronto,Ontario,Canada | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |

posted 03-19-200102:15 AM
Baptist, I am incredibly glad for you that you are so convicted in your religion.... but go ahead....argue the constitution with me. How can you claim what you're claiming? It is COMPLETELY ludicrous. To tell the truth, it can be easily argued that by not allowing homosexual marriage, the Equal Protection rights of the 5th and 14th amendments are grossly violated. The 14th amendment states that any State shall not "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." When one group is allowed something (straight people allowed the institution of marriage), and another group is not allowed that thing (gay people) then there is a violation of equal protection.

As for your claim about freedom of religion, the 1st amendment speaks to a person's right to choose their religious beliefs, or lack thereof. While we're on the topic, can you define Christian for me? I believe Jesus died on the cross for me... that my only way to salvation is through Him. I am a Christian. I believe wholeheartedly that God made me bisexual and He wants me that way. Therefore, when you State: "Christians... don't believe that homosexuality is a viable lifestyle" you are sterotyping me, and I don't appreciate it. Maybe the right-wing fundamentalist, Christian Coalition doesn't believe that homosexuality is a viable lifestyle, but they are ignorant. If you are going to praise the 1st amendment as your Savior for denial of facts of life, at least come up with a sensible way to do it. Don't think that Christians are the center of the universe. If we were to apply your logic, then any religion besides Christianity would have to be outlawed, as they are not consisten with the precepts of Christianity. Now, maybe this is something you want, but I don't. And it would clearly be violative of the 1st amendment. Sorry Baptist, but your argument just doesn't hold water.

You mention tax dollars of Christians going to support gay marriages and the benefits thereof... last time I checked, it isn't up to the citizens to decide how the tax money is spent (it's up to Congress if you didn't know, usually with the help of the Executive Branch's Office of Management and Budget) and if it were, then there would still remain a flaw in your logic. If you are going to claim that "Christian's" (and by Christian you must mean the bigoted ones?) money being used against what they believe proper is a violation of their 1st amendment rights, can you learn another number please? The 1st amendment has nothing to do with how tax money is spent! It's about freedom of religion and the press, and the right to free speech. I guess I missed the connection you made (or did you forget to make it) between government cpaital and these fundamental freedoms which you are so willing to deny to us.

quote:Originally posted by Baptist:All of you are missing a simple fact. If you make any laws that promote homosexual marriages or adoption, those laws are unconstitutional. Those laws violate the First Amendment rights of Christians who don't believe that homosexuality is a viable lifestyle. This is because the government would force them to recognize something that goes against their religion. That would be like forcing a Jew to recognize Christ as the Messiah. Plus, the tax dollars of Christians would go towards benefits for these homosexual marriages which is another violation of the First Amendment.

posted 05-27-200109:13 PM
First of all , Iv'e allways thought that Rosie's dykish , however , my opinon really dosn't matter until she actually says something . To get on topic , Love , I mean real love , is the rarest of all the roses in the Big Garden , so why would anyone say that it is wrong . Also , some say that ( insert diety of your choice here ) is Love , so how can anyone say that love , no matter what kind of love it is, is wrong ?

This has absolutely nothing to do with any topic in this section , I'm just giving a little x-tra info. . I'm an opinionated/ffteen yr. old/Pagan/femmanist/bi. woman with a low level of tolerance for hipocrates , for example... " I have nothing against so-and so's but... " Also when the word "but" is used in the middle of a sentance , it usually cancels out the first part of the sentance .

Information on this site is provided for educational purposes. It is not meant to and cannot substitute for advice or care provided by an in-person medical professional. The information contained herein is not meant to be used to diagnose or treat a health problem or disease, or for prescribing any medication. You should always consult your own healthcare provider if you have a health problem or medical condition.